NUMSA and Others v Transnet SOC Ltd (PR58/16) [2017] ZALCPE 30 (25 October 2017)

NUMSA and Others v Transnet SOC Ltd (PR58/16) [2017] ZALCPE 30 (25 October 2017)

The court held that the arbitrator properly exercised his discretion in refusing condonation for the late referral of the unfair dismissal dispute. The delay was inordinate and primarily due to the union's negligence, not excused by the festive season or transmission errors. The arbitrator reasonably accepted Transnet's explanation for the late answering affidavit and found no evidence of collusion at the disciplinary hearing. The arbitrator's ruling was not so unreasonable that no other arbitrator could have reached the same conclusion, and thus it was not open to review.

Citation
[2017] ZALCPE 30
Parties
Applicant: NUMSA and Others; Respondent: Transnet SOC Ltd
Court
Labour Court Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 October 2017
Case Number
PR58/16
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Review of Condonation Ruling by Bargaining Council Arbitrator
Outcome
Application for review dismissed with costs.
Judges
Steenkamp
Legal Topics
Condonation, Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Gross Insubordination
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Gross Insubordination

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NUMSA and Others

Applicant

Transnet SOC Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Review of Condonation Ruling by Bargaining Council Arbitrator

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator's refusal to grant condonation for late referral of the unfair dismissal dispute was so unreasonable that no other arbitrator could have reached the same conclusion.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator properly exercised his discretion in considering the degree of lateness, reasons for delay, prospects of success, and prejudice.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator erred in accepting Transnet's answering affidavit filed five days late.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the arbitrator properly exercised his discretion in refusing condonation for the late referral of the unfair dismissal dispute. The delay was inordinate and primarily due to the union's negligence, not excused by the festive season or transmission errors. The arbitrator reasonably accepted Transnet's explanation for the late answering affidavit and found no evidence of collusion at the disciplinary hearing. The arbitrator's ruling was not so unreasonable that no other arbitrator could have reached the same conclusion, and thus it was not open to review.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed with costs.